Thursday 30 June 2016

A new trajectory for India-Africa ties

India now sees Africa as a promising market for Indian goods, services, and investments. This is evident in the government’s recent concerted focus on the India-Africa relationship—high profile visits by top leaders to African countries, a recasting of India’s development diplomacy, and an attempt to match action to past promises


India’s relationship with Africa has been through an unprecedented intensification in June 2016. In the first week of the month, Vice President Hamid Ansari visited Tunisia and Morocco. In the second week, President Pranab Mukherjee embarked on a tour of western and southern Africa, covering Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire, and Namibia. And in July, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to visit Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, and South Africa.

The present renewed outreach is also unabashedly about business, and a good example of geo-politics combining with geo-economics. India views Africa as a promising market for Indian goods, services, and investments. So far though, any follow-up on promises had remained anaemic. Now, Indian leaders are seeking out fresh investment opportunities for Indian public and private sector companies in different African countries.

The vice president’s visits to Morocco and Tunisia are crucial because India imports phosphate—a critical raw material for fertiliser production—from these countries. Ansari also inaugurated an India-Morocco Chamber of Commerce during his trip to Rabat.

The president’s three-country tour provided an opportunity to further India’s business interests. At the India-Ghana Business Forum, Mukherjee said: “…the Indian Government would be ready to work with you in key sectors and areas of common interest and encourage Indian private as well as public entrepreneurs to bring more investments into Ghana.”[1] India’s cumulative investments in Ghana are over $1 billion and two-way trade during 2015-16 amounted to $3 billion.[2]

In Cote d’Ivoire, Mukherjee said: “…your country is blessed with fertile soil and abundant agricultural and mineral resources. Our public and private sectors are keen to join you in exploring these resources efficiently and in setting up agro-based industries.”[3]

At the same time, India’s development diplomacy for the continent has been through a strategic shift. Exim Bank, for example, is now likely to focus more on service exports, rather than compete with China for infrastructure projects in Africa.

The bank is looking to disburse close to Rs. 10,000 crores in Africa over the next three years as both commercial and concessional credit.[4] Service exports aim to build on India’s traditional strengths in Africa and will include healthcare, education, and information technology services. Exim inaugurated an office in Cote d’Ivoire during Mukherjee’s visit. The office is expected to widen the bank’s footprint in West Africa.

Exim Bank is also looking to sharpen its focus on another area of India’s traditional exports to Africa: project exports. It has requested the Reserve Bank of India to ease regulatory and compliance guidelines regarding minimum equity capital, leverage (the multiples—3X, 4X or 8X—of share capital that a company can borrow) and the maximum that the bank can lend to a single borrower.[5] These will be necessary if the bank is to make project exports one of its thrust areas.

These actions are in line with promises made during the Third India-Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) in October 2015. The first two editions of the summit—in 2008 and 2011—made numerous pledges but fell short on follow-up and delivery. Both sides were responsible for the indifferent implementation.

The last IAFS, held in October 2015, saw a strategic shift in focus—apart from the usual rhetoric, there was a better alignment of India’s global ambitions (both political and geo-economic) and traditional strengths.[6] [7] Importantly, the third IAFS created a formal monitoring mechanism to regularly review the progress of various projects at different stages of completion.

The summit aimed high—it also sought to create a global alliance of solar-rich countries.[8] Such an alliance will help create goodwill for India among Africa countries, and generate solidarity through collective bargaining when accessing IPR-protected technology from rich countries.

It’s starting with this summit that Modi has been building bridges with different African countries and soliciting support for a host of multilateral initiatives. These include backing for India’s membership of the UN Security Council along with a united front of emerging and poor economies at the World Trade Organisation.

The high-octane official Africa engagements will also help assuage concerns regarding India after recent allegedly racist incidents involving African nationals living in the country. But it is now up to India to ensure that its belated recognition of the critical role Africa can play in our strategic calculus, as well as in India’s trade and investment expansion plans, is not just a temporary spurt.

This feature was exclusively written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can also read it here.

References
[1] Mukherjee, Pranab, ‘Address at the India-Ghana Business Forum Event’; Speech delivered at Accra, 13 June 2016, <http://presidentofindia.nic.in/speeches-detail.htm?531>

[2] Press Release, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, Visit of President to Ghana (June 12-14, 2016), 6 June 2016, <http://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/26872/Visit_of_President_to_Ghana_June_1214_2016>

[3] Mukherjee, Pranab, ‘President of India; Speech in response to welcome speech by President of Cote d’Ivoire’ Speech delivered in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, 14 June 2016, <http://presidentofindia.nic.in/speeches-detail.htm?534>

[4] S, Arun, ‘Exim Bank’s African credit to boost service exports’, The Hindu, 12 June, 2016, <http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/exim-banks-african-credit-to-boost-services-exports/article8721312.ece>

[5] Lele, Abhijit, ‘Commerce ministry, RBI to review regulatory norms for Exim Bank’Business Standard, 24 May 2016, <http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/commerce-ministry-rbi-to-review-regulatory-norms-for-exim-bank-116052400042_1.html>

[6] Documents, Third India-Africa Forum Summit, India Africa Framework for Strategic Cooperation, 29 October 2015, <http://www.iafs.in/documents-detail.php?archive_id=323>

[7] Documents, Third India-Africa Forum Summit, Delhi Declaration 2015, 29 October 2015, <http://www.iafs.in/documents-detail.php?archive_id=322>

[8] Speeches, Third India-Africa Forum Summit, Speech by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi at the Inaugural Ceremony, 29 October 2015, <http://www.iafs.in/speeches-detail.php?speeches_id=276>

Monday 20 June 2016

The Legacy: Raghuram Rajan is leaving the battlefield just when he was getting the better of his rivals

India’s debonair central banker, Raghuram Rajan, leaves behind many broken hearts and disappointed souls. Chronicles of his legacy will list many achievements, but will also note that he left the battlefield just when he was getting the better of his rivals; what’s surprising is that the commander-in-chief agreed to his pre-mature withdrawal even though the general’s strategies could be seen bearing fruit.

Equally perplexing will be the choice of his replacement.

Both the government and Rajan personally have been advocates of an alternative global financial architecture. He has also been proposing for a while that it was time for a new Bretton Woods mechanism. And Rajan had taken the battle to the enemy camp. At the April 2016 spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, Rajan observed how deeply multilateral financial institutions were in thrall of western economic orthodoxies. He even wryly remarked how ideas from emerging economies were dismissed as “crankiness.”

He was prescient about the trans-Atlantic financial crisis. He took on former US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke when US domestic monetary policy spilled over into the global economy and led to severe volatility in emerging markets. He is unlikely to have fond memories of the period: he had to douse this particular fire soon after his appointment in Sept. 2013.

So, here is question number one: Will his successor have the same zeal about promoting an alternative global financial architecture that is sensitive to emerging economy needs and is not partisan about any particular economic ideology?

Rajan also quits before another crusade could be brought to its logical end. He’s been battening down the hatches that allowed a cosy nexus between large corporate borrowers, bankers, politicians, and bureaucrats, to bleed public sector banks through questionable debt write-offs. Rajan had taken a large broom to bank balance sheets and forced them to take drastic action against defaulters.

Many large—and over-stretched—corporate borrowers have been carping about Rajan’s reluctance to reduce interest rates, which, when lowered, would have certainly helped moderate their interest burden. These same corporates also turned into quack economists on the matter of interest rates: in their collective view, only lower interest rates could bring back high rates of economic growth. This view is oblivious to the fact that the low interest rates in the US, or negative rates in Europe and Japan, have failed to promote any economic growth.

Time for question number two: Will Rajan’s successor have the stomach (or benign sanction from the government) to continue with the clean-up act? Or to hold rates steady when required?

So, what does Rajan’s legacy look like? Apart from the well-documented success in fending off volatility from the US Fed’s tapering in 2013, his tenure will be remembered for three systemic changes he fostered.

One will be the differentiated banking landscape that he designed and left behind. As RBI governor, he grandfathered the emergence of a new breed of universal, small, and payments banks. He was in the process of adding two more categories—custodian banks and wholesale (or long-term) financing banks—to the mix. We will now have to wait and see if his successor has the same enthusiasm for a differentiated banking model.

These new categories come in addition to existing myriad forms of cooperative banks, regional rural banks, local area banks, public sector scheduled commercial banks, State Bank of India group of scheduled commercial banks, old-generation private sector banks, new-generation private sector banks, and foreign banks.

Restive signs mark the payments banks space—three companies which received in-principle approval to launch payments banks (Cholamandalam, Tech Mahindra, and Dilip Shanghvi of Sun Pharma) returned their licences stating that the project was not economically feasible. Undeniably, and in true RBI style, the initial architecture is anti-profit and has flaws in it.

The second marquee item is his strict action against non-performing assets (NPAs) that continue to impair bank balance-sheets. This was viewed as his struggle to end Indian-style crony capitalism: large volumes of loans remain unpaid every year and yet defaulting borrowers manage to get fresh loans unfailingly with some help from politicians, bureaucrats, and complicit bankers.

The staggering amount of NPAs is a direct drain on taxpayers, since loss to state-owned bank balance sheets must be compensated with fresh equity infusion by the largest shareholder—government— every year.

Finally, the outgoing governor will be remembered for installing a new monetary policy framework, which uses inflation-targeting as its driving philosophy. It also includes a monetary policy committee comprising three government representatives and three central bankers, with the RBI governor getting the casting vote. This new structure overhauls the old belief that the economy’s fiscal (the government) and monetary policy (central bank) sides should remain out of each other’s hair.

While the government has been uncomfortable with Rajan’s public comments about governance and broader political economy trends—saying that central bankers should not interfere with the fiscal side—it has not shown the same restraint when trying to influence monetary policy.

It will have to be seen how future central bankers and monetary historians view Rajan’s acquiescence to large government presence in monetary policy making.

The article first appeared in www.qz.com/india and can also be read here.

Sunday 19 June 2016

What does Brexit mean for India?

On June 23, the United Kingdom will vote on whether they wish to remain a part of the European Union through the Brexit vote. The debate surrounding the vote has spurred many a heated and emotional debate. While the Indian government has not declared anything publicly - remaining in the EU would be beneficial to Indian businesses.


The Brexit referendum on June 23 — whether the United Kingdom (U.K.) chooses to stay on in European Union (EU) or to quit the mega regional agreement — has spawned its fair share of heated and emotional debates. Equities, commodities and currency markets have tossed and turned at either prospect. Indian markets have also been agitated at the likely outcomes. An impassive view, though, shows that Indian trade and business interests might benefit from UK staying in.

While the Indian government has not taken a public position on the issue, since it doesn’t want to be seen interfering in another country’s sovereign exercises, newspaper reports says Indian ministers have conveyed to their UK counterparts against exiting.[1]

This stand may have been informed by Indian business’s unambiguous and public support for UK staying on in EU. A statement issued by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) says unequivocally: “…we firmly believe that leaving the EU, would create considerable uncertainty for Indian businesses engaged with UK and would possibly have an adverse impact on investment and movement of professionals to the UK.”[2] While the other leading industry association, Confederation of Indian Industry, has refrained from issuing any official statements, its representatives have expressed their reservations in different interviews.

There are valid reasons for Indian business concerns.

One, Brexit supporters say the UK will be able to sign new and better trade agreements — free of EU’s restrictive rules — with its strategic partners, such as India and China. They also cite the stalled India-EU trade and investment talks to buttress their argument. However, experience shows negotiating trade and investment pacts takes a long time. For example, the India-Korea Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement took five years to finalise[3]. There are concerns over the interim uncertainty for trade and investment flows.

There is another associated hassle. Assuming that Indian business tides over the interim uncertainties, it will still have to adhere to two different standards and rules when trading in the same geography. This entails additional costs.

Two, most Indian businesses use the U.K. as a springboard for their European operations, given India’s historical and cultural affinity with the country. If those favouring exit win, Indian businesses will have to install a parallel set-up on mainland Europe for conducting their operations. For instance, a portion of the Indian foreign direct investment (FDI) into the UK is to access the European markets. Now, Indian companies will have to separate their investments for the two distinct markets. This means additional costs, regulatory wrangles and legal complications. In addition, the complexity of negotiating new tax laws is likely to prove a nightmare.

Three, there are apprehensions that a Brexit success would inspire other EU members to explore a similar option. This would lead to fragmentation and the Indian government would then have to negotiate separate agreements with each country. This will add to the general confusion and add to regulatory and compliance costs for Indian business.

Finally, Brexit might raise myriad central banking problems. First, Reserve Bank of India (RBI) will have to re-calibrate its monetary policies to cope with the currency markets volatility. Additional liquidity measures might have to be implemented to stave off rupee volatility; this might temporarily derail the central’s banks monetary policy objectives for 2016-17.

But more importantly, if Brexit goes through, expect prolonged volatility in the currency markets and a sharp drop in both pound and euro values. This will not only mean a downward revision in valuation of RBI’s currency reserves, it will also require the central bank to re-adjust the composition of its ForEx reserves. Though not substantial, RBI’s volume of euro and sterling pound holdings are also not exactly negligible.

This feature was exclusively written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. It can also be read here.

References
[1] Watch on Brexit, oil prices; The Telegraph; June 17, 2016;http://www.telegraphindia.com/1160617/jsp/business/story_91646.jsp#.V2TnN-Z96uU

[2] Singh, Dr Didar A; Ficci Secretary General; Ficci Comments on UK Referendum on Brexit; February 24, 2016; http://ficci.in/PressRelease/2293/ficci-press-feb24-uk.pdf

[3] Ahmed, Shahid; India-Korea CEPA: An Assessment; pages 45-98; Korea and the World Economy, Vol. 12, No. 1 (April 2011);http://www.akes.or.kr/akes/downfile/12.1.3_ahmed.pdf